Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #166326 > unrolled thread

unattended aptitude

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  unattended aptitude Pierre Frenkiel <pierre.frenkiel@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 10:20 +0200
    Re: unattended aptitude Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de> - 2016-04-04 11:20 +0200
      Re: unattended aptitude Pierre Frenkiel <pierre.frenkiel@gmx.com> - 2016-04-04 11:50 +0200
        Re: unattended aptitude Jochen Spieker <ml@well-adjusted.de> - 2016-04-04 12:10 +0200
    Re: unattended aptitude Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-04-04 11:30 +0200
      Re: unattended aptitude <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-04-04 12:20 +0200
        Re: unattended aptitude Pierre Frenkiel <pierre.frenkiel@gmx.com> - 2016-04-04 14:50 +0200
          Re: unattended aptitude <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-04-04 15:20 +0200
      Re: unattended aptitude Pierre Frenkiel <pierre.frenkiel@gmx.com> - 2016-04-04 12:20 +0200
        Re: unattended aptitude Pierre Frenkiel <pierre.frenkiel@gmx.com> - 2016-04-04 12:30 +0200
          Re: unattended aptitude Jean-Louis Mas <Jean-Louis.Mas@imag.fr> - 2016-04-04 15:00 +0200
            Re: unattended aptitude Pierre Frenkiel <pierre.frenkiel@gmail.com> - 2016-04-04 15:20 +0200
              Re: unattended aptitude Jean-Louis Mas <Jean-Louis.Mas@imag.fr> - 2016-04-04 18:50 +0200

#166326 — unattended aptitude

hi,
I would like run "aptitude safe-upgrade" without staying in front of my
screen for hours
A convenient way would be to postpone to the end of the upgrade all
package installs needing an answer, like

  ==> File on system created by you or by a script.
  ==> File also in package provided by package maintainer.
    What would you like to do about it ?

but I don't see any way to do that(it would be nice to have
such an option in aptitude...)

An other solution is to use the -y flag, but in that case it's
the package maintainer's file  which is installed.
Is there a way to run aptitude with "N" as automatic answer?
May-be redirecting input from a file with several "N" lines ?

best regards,
-- 
Pierre Frenkiel

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#166327

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Pierre Frenkiel:
> 
> Is there a way to run aptitude with "N" as automatic answer?
> May-be redirecting input from a file with several "N" lines ?

That might interfere with standard questions like the first question
that asks whether you actually want to install/upgrade the listed
packages. But if you get around that, you can use the tool "yes" for
that. If you pass "n" as the first argument, it will continuously print
that instead of "y":

aptitude | yes n

What a pity that you cannot use "yes no" :)

J.
-- 
If nightclub doormen recognised me I would be more fulfilled.
[Agree]   [Disagree]
                 <http://archive.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#166330

On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, Jochen Spieker wrote:

> aptitude | yes n

   I imagine you want to say

     yes n | aptitude

best regards,
-- 
Pierre Frenkiel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#166331

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Pierre Frenkiel:
> On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, Jochen Spieker wrote:
> 
>> aptitude | yes n
> 
>   I imagine you want to say
> 
>     yes n | aptitude

Correct! But I guess Brian's suggestion is better.

J.
-- 
I eat meat and am concerned about bugs which are resistant to
antibiotics.
[Agree]   [Disagree]
                 <http://archive.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#166328

On Mon 04 Apr 2016 at 10:12:25 +0200, Pierre Frenkiel wrote:

> hi,
> I would like run "aptitude safe-upgrade" without staying in front of my
> screen for hours
> A convenient way would be to postpone to the end of the upgrade all
> package installs needing an answer, like
> 
>  ==> File on system created by you or by a script.
>  ==> File also in package provided by package maintainer.
>    What would you like to do about it ?
> 
> but I don't see any way to do that(it would be nice to have
> such an option in aptitude...)
> 
> An other solution is to use the -y flag, but in that case it's
> the package maintainer's file  which is installed.
> Is there a way to run aptitude with "N" as automatic answer?
> May-be redirecting input from a file with several "N" lines ?

In the dpkg manual you'll find 'confnew' and 'confdef', apt-get accepts
dpkg paramters. aptitude probably does too.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#166332

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 11:51:56AM +0200, Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, Brian wrote:
> 
> >In the dpkg manual you'll find 'confnew' and 'confdef', apt-get accepts
> >dpkg paramters. aptitude probably does too.
> >
>     what is the exact syntax?
>     I tried:
>     apt-get --force-things confold dist-upgrade
>     E: Command line option --force-things is not understood

Ah -- the "things" in --force-things is a syntactic metavariable[1] :-)

To really find out what "things" you can force, you can ask your dpkg.
Mine says so:

 | tomas@rasputin:~$ dpkg --force-help
 | dpkg forcing options - control behaviour when problems found:
 |   warn but continue:  --force-<thing>,<thing>,...
 |   stop with error:    --refuse-<thing>,<thing>,... | --no-force-<thing>,...
 |  Forcing things:
 |   [!] all                Set all force options
 |   [*] downgrade          Replace a package with a lower version
 |       configure-any      Configure any package which may help this one
 |       hold               Process incidental packages even when on hold
 |       not-root           Try to (de)install things even when not root
 |       bad-path           PATH is missing important programs, problems likely
 |       bad-verify         Install a package even if it fails authenticity check
 |       bad-version        Process even packages with wrong versions
 |       overwrite          Overwrite a file from one package with another
 |       overwrite-diverted Overwrite a diverted file with an undiverted version
 |   [!] overwrite-dir      Overwrite one package's directory with another's file
 |   [!] unsafe-io          Do not perform safe I/O operations when unpacking
 |   [!] confnew            Always use the new config files, don't prompt
 |   [!] confold            Always use the old config files, don't prompt
 |   [!] confdef            Use the default option for new config files if one
 |                          is available, don't prompt. If no default can be found,
 |                          you will be prompted unless one of the confold or
 |                          confnew options is also given
 |   [!] confmiss           Always install missing config files
 |   [!] confask            Offer to replace config files with no new versions
 |   [!] architecture       Process even packages with wrong or no architecture
 |   [!] breaks             Install even if it would break another package
 |   [!] conflicts          Allow installation of conflicting packages
 |   [!] depends            Turn all dependency problems into warnings
 |   [!] depends-version    Turn dependency version problems into warnings
 |   [!] remove-reinstreq   Remove packages which require installation
 |   [!] remove-essential   Remove an essential package
 | 
 | WARNING - use of options marked [!] can seriously damage your installation.
 | Forcing options marked [*] are enabled by default.

Please, be careful and take the warning seriously.

Regards

[1] a stilted way of saying that it is a placeholder

- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlcCN20ACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYXrQCfWKmRG1PI7pe3g3h58hxvTz7n
xqAAnRSncQY5Q7BF0J7VSDWdwK3qeJlF
=E9+H
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#166342

On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:

> Ah -- the "things" in --force-things is a syntactic metavariable[1] :-)

   Actually, I tried
       aptitude --force-things confold safe-upgrade
       aptitude --force-things=confold safe-upgrade
       aptitude --force-confold safe-upgrade

    and all gave the same "aptitude: unrecognized option"
    but gave me the opportunity to discover the "Super Cow Powers" and
    all the "aptitude -v moo" gags (.

    What was missing was the -o flag. With it, both works:

       aptitude -o --force-things=confold safe-upgrade
         and
       aptitude -o --force-confold safe-upgrade

best regards,
-- 
Pierre Frenkiel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#166347

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 02:30:22PM +0200, Pierre Frenkiel wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> 
> >Ah -- the "things" in --force-things is a syntactic metavariable[1] :-)
> 
>   Actually, I tried
>       aptitude --force-things confold safe-upgrade
>       aptitude --force-things=confold safe-upgrade
>       aptitude --force-confold safe-upgrade
> 
>    and all gave the same "aptitude: unrecognized option"
>    but gave me the opportunity to discover the "Super Cow Powers" and
>    all the "aptitude -v moo" gags (.
> 
>    What was missing was the -o flag. With it, both works:
> 
>       aptitude -o --force-things=confold safe-upgrade
>         and
>       aptitude -o --force-confold safe-upgrade

Oh, I see.

Now I learnt something new, thanks!

regards
- -- t
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAlcCYZUACgkQBcgs9XrR2kajrgCfQcpWpFnoCo2bbcsltJNrohzT
omoAn1s+SBx+CqqUjvUhXRyaemSja5Mo
=zHcY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#166333

On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, Brian wrote:

> In the dpkg manual you'll find 'confnew' and 'confdef', apt-get accepts
> dpkg paramters. aptitude probably does too.
>
     what is the exact syntax?
     I tried:
     apt-get --force-things confold dist-upgrade
     E: Command line option --force-things is not understood

best regards,
-- 
Pierre Frenkiel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#166334

On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, Pierre Frenkiel wrote:

>    what is the exact syntax?
>    I tried:
>    apt-get --force-things confold dist-upgrade
>    E: Command line option --force-things is not understood

     I found this:

      aptitude -y -o Dpkg::Options::=--force-confdef -o Dpkg::Options::=--force-confold safe-upgrade

      this command is accepted.
      I'll try it as soon as some upgrades are available.

best regards,
-- 
Pierre Frenkiel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#166343

Le 04/04/2016 12:09, Pierre Frenkiel a écrit :

>      aptitude -y -o Dpkg::Options::=--force-confdef -o
> Dpkg::Options::=--force-confold safe-upgrade
> 
>      this command is accepted.
>      I'll try it as soon as some upgrades are available.

We use this command with apt-get instead of aptitude for our debian
servers since February. It works fine so far.

We sometime have trouble, for example with nslcd security update this
morning were the restart service messed up.

We don't know if it's related to our command, the debian package,
systemd or something else. We're still trying to find the culprit.


-- 
Jean Louis Mas
Équipe MISI LIG Bâtiment IM²AG B Bureau 100 Tel: 04 76 51 46 14

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#166349

On Mon, 4 Apr 2016, Jean-Louis Mas wrote:

>
>>      aptitude -y -o Dpkg::Options::=--force-confdef -o
>> Dpkg::Options::=--force-confold safe-upgrade
>
> We use this command with apt-get instead of aptitude for our debian
> servers since February. It works fine so far.
>
> We sometime have trouble, for example with nslcd security update this
> morning were the restart service messed up.
>
> We don't know if it's related to our command, the debian package,
> systemd or something else. We're still trying to find the culprit.

   hi Jean-Louis,
   I think that with this option (or with --force-confnew),
   one must look carefully at the differences between the .dpkg-dist
   config files and the keeped ones.

   This may help you to find the culprit.


best regards,
-- 
Pierre Frenkiel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#166375

Le 04/04/2016 15:13, Pierre Frenkiel a écrit :

>   I think that with this option (or with --force-confnew),
>   one must look carefully at the differences between the .dpkg-dist
>   config files and the keeped ones.

We do look from time to time to .dpkg-dist files, in order to update our
puppet managed config files. We mostly have Debian stable servers, so
config files seldom change.

>   This may help you to find the culprit.

Got it, but it's still pending
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=814881


Regards
-- 
Jean Louis Mas

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web